Honestly the council cant be serious allowing this sort/type of development in this street. The property size just isnt big enough for THREE dwellings to be built.
"1st"
4A2.4 Streetscape presentation:
Development must be designed to reinforce and maintain the existing character of the streetscape
Quite simply, It doesn't match the street scape in anyway/short or form.
"2nd"
4A.4.1 Visual Privacy - Control C1 & C2
The privacy needs of residents should be considered in designing a new dwelling or alterations and additions to a dwelling. Windows are to be located so they do not provide direct or close views into the windows of other dwellings, particularly those of living areas
Quite simply due to the whole bulk density of this development the resident of all the houses surrounding this development will lose all of their privacy's
"3rd"
4A.4.3 Solar Access Control C1
Buildings (including alterations/additions/extensions) are to be designed and sited to maintain approximately 2 hours of solar access between 9am and 3pm on 21 June to windows in living areas (family rooms, rumpus, lounge and kitchens) and to 50% of the primary private open space areas of both the subject site and adjoining properties.
The proposed development does not maintain 2 hours of solar access to the resident of 31 Swinbourne st and will also cast huge amounts of shadows to the resident of 27 & 29 Swinbourne st too.
We could go on with "4A.2.6 Floor Space Ratio - Control C3" & also front + sides & rear setbacks and how this development doent meet any of these to the Botany bay development control plans.
Come on council, proposing subdividing this property into three lots and than allowing construction of TWO semi detached dwellings, plus a single story dwelling is just plain madness. For once put yourself in the shoes of the resident living on Victoria st and Queen st.
Thank you
Craig
